The whole tenor of the Bush’s admiminstration’s energy policy sounds creepier every day. Now we have Bush telling us that if we can avoid going “on a trip that’s not essential, that would be helpful.” This is his proposal on how “we can all pitch in.” As the New York Times points out, this is reversal from past adminstration statements.
How far Bush is willing to take this will be determined by events. If he really believes his Will alone will bring about reduced consumption, and also believes that raising prices in an emergency is price gouging for which he will have “zero tolerance for people breaking the law,” the next step of price control seems not too much of a stretch.
{ 3 comments }
It’s turning into no-holds-barred wartime collectivism, isn’t it? Even more daft because there isn’t actually a shortage of gas as such, it’s just more expensive at the moment – I’m sure even at “price gouging” prices it still doesn’t come near how much we have to pay for the privilege of buying gas in the UK (it’s mostly tax of course).
I consider the issue of “price gouging” to be one of those examples where you can clearly determine who has common sense, and who does not. The really distressing thing is that it is clear that most Americans do not have it.
What is the definition of price gouging? Who determines the limit? These glaring questions most people just seem to take for granted. The fact is, if you value gas at a “very high price” more than the money you shell out for it, all is fair. Price gouging, in my view, is the price at which consumers are unwilling to pay. In that case, price gouging is an impossibility.
Comments on this entry are closed.